If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

the best thing about him was that he'll address the nation every now and then and was in contact with the common people...Zardari doesn't even bother addressing the nation or go out of his president house or Bilawal house.

Musharraf's existencehad no effect on the economy. The global economy was booming during 2000-2007 so how can people attribute the economy to him - people forget Musharraf's last two years when inflation was high, the cost of living was increasing and unemployment rapidly increased. Nothing was done about electricity shortages. There was the decision to export wheat in 2007 that created shortages and price hikes that helped bring down the PML-Q government and ultimately led to President Musharraf's departure.

The vulnerability of the economy to external funds was revealed by the data on investments and its sources by the finance ministry. During the Musharraf period, the rate of investment had increased by a third, from 17.2% of GDP in 2001-02 to 23% in 2006-07. However domestic savings have declined from 17.8% to 16.1% of GDP in the same period.

This means that the economy was even more dependent on foreign flows than was the case in the 1990s.

The sale of Pakistan Steel Mill is just one example of Musharraf's corruption. He was going to sell it for nothing. It was Supreme Court who stopped this madness.

And then after 2005, Musharraf ran roughshod over every civilian institution such as the Supreme Court and the media. There was the State of Emergency which created unnecessary chaos. It was under Musharraf that the drone programme started.

PPP and PML-N were weak after the 1990s but Musharraf came in and made martyrs out of both parties. A wasted era.

1. He damaged civil institutions.
2. Diplomacy was nil as it shows the way he joined WOT.
3. Kargil was never a strategic step for Pakistan.
4. Whatever better economy ppl talk about his era is not cuz of his policy but due to other reasons which were not sustainable.
5. Most of the situations today are because of Mush's action or inaction during those decade.

Laughing Faces Don't Mean Absence Of Sorrow. It Means That They Have The Ability To Deal With It

You didn't have to go through 5 years of zardari...if you did you wouldn't see Musharraf in such bad light anymore. Seriously zardari has done absolutely nothing but steal as much as he can from the country

Alone we are Pathan, Punjabi, Sindhi and Balochi...together we are Pakistan

1. He damaged civil institutions.
2. Diplomacy was nil as it shows the way he joined WOT.
3. Kargil was never a strategic step for Pakistan.
4. Whatever better economy ppl talk about his era is not cuz of his policy but due to other reasons which were not sustainable.
5. Most of the situations today are because of Mush's action or inaction during those decade.

Well said and I fully agree with your observation.
But purely in terms of where our country was standing, Musharraf's era was definitely better than Zardari.

Having said that, I prefer living in the present. Dictatorship has only resulted in ruin. Short term gains but detrimental in the long run.

You may feel better test driving a Bugatti Veyron, but it's not for everyone. Many (in fact most) better things in life come at a big price and you can't afford to pay that. Pak army has over the years provided temporary stability and direction to your country but like Garuda mentioned, your nation had to pay a big price for that service. Your democratic institutions got weak as a result of army interference and it has eventually pushed you back by a few years, so much that the likes of Bangladesh are expected to get ahead in coming few years.

Students will feel 'better' if a comedian shows up in their class instead of history or science teacher but that doesn't help them in studies. In that sense, 'better' in itself is irrelevant. What matters is the price that you pay for it and the 'real' difference that it makes.

the best thing about him was that he'll address the nation every now and then and was in contact with the common people...Zardari doesn't even bother addressing the nation or go out of his president house or Bilawal house.

its because Zardari knows if he address the nation "usko gaalian paren gi"

Compared to the current Zardari regime, even a banana republic run by an incompetent and ruthless tin pot dictator will look lie a utopian state...

So comparison between Zardari and Mush is nothing but a poor attempt to show Mush in a good light, when Mush was only marginally better then Zardari...

I agree about first half of your statement but not second. To say he was marginally better would be like saying Inzi is marginally better than Salman Butt. The pain people are feeling in Pakistan is much more phenomenal, they never complained about basic needs in Mush's era. Sure they complained about his authoritarian rule, dismissing judges, introducing action against Lal Masjid etc. but common man had relief , much more than during Zardari's rule.

Musharraf's era vs Zardari era?

Is this a serious question? Mush was a dictator who was never voted in by people of Pakistan. He was a an employee of Pakistan state and had no right to rule the country. Problem with our people is that they have short memories, no patience and no respect.

Mush created most of the issues in the country today. Drones, Talibanisation, Bilochistan issue were all there during Mush regime. He was a traitor who screwed the country and brought it to its knees to his lust for power.

PPP was almost wiped out in 97 and N was heading in the same direction but this h@rami messed the whole system up and took us back to 1980.

Musharraf's era vs Zardari era?

SS Bhai: i am not supporting Mush. But when he is compared to Zardari then it is not fair. Zardari is a crook. Anyone would be better than Zardari. I really feel sorry for the people of PKistan who support mr 10%.

Musharraf's era vs Zardari era?

SS Bhai: i am not supporting Mush. But when he is compared to Zardari then it is not fair. Zardari is a crook. Anyone would be better than Zardari. I really feel sorry for the people of PKistan who support mr 10%.

SS Bhai: i am not supporting Mush. But when he is compared to Zardari then it is not fair. Zardari is a crook. Anyone would be better than Zardari. I really feel sorry for the people of PKistan who support mr 10%.

You Are still living in the past with 10% ? Now it might be 75%. Only one secretary OGDC has done 80 billion rupees of corruption . What about the rest?

You didn't have to go through 5 years of zardari...if you did you wouldn't see Musharraf in such bad light anymore. Seriously zardari has done absolutely nothing but steal as much as he can from the country

Before I posted my point, for a moment I thought exactly what you pointed out.

For a second I really thought about how people would be feeling who tolerated this regime for last 5 years. For them it's their life which is getting affected which was better under Mush.

But then I realized that Mush actually could have made this 5 years better. What people are seeing today actually a lot due to those 10 years.

In a country when some policy is made (or not made), the impact is shown after a decade. You never see the impact immediately.

Zardari may be currupt to the core, but real damage to the country to my view is done by Mush's 10 years.

Laughing Faces Don't Mean Absence Of Sorrow. It Means That They Have The Ability To Deal With It

Musharaf was good when he was a dictator, the problem started when he went to the hand of politicians and started considering himself a better politician.

I have made a thread about democracy, and still support my point, that democracy in our society is just a fraud. There is more than 65% people are illiterate and out of 35 % people, how many people are really educated?

In a country where educated people are discussing on Facebook the issue of Mohammad Irfan's name illuminated on the screen and blame as an Indian conspiracy to insult Mohammad's name, what do you expect from the same people when they exercise their option to vote?

Weather army is in power or not, they are going to take their share of money, but the problem with the democracy, we invite 2nd parasite to share the pie and the 2nd parasite is more dangerous than the first one, because this one is the elected and from among us, and he is suppose to protect us from the first parasite, but instead he try to bite us more severe and at the end, act innocent and mazloom and come back with the force for the next term.

In a country where educated people are discussing on Facebook the issue of Mohammad Irfan's name illuminated on the screen and blame as an Indian conspiracy to insult Mohammad's name, what do you expect from the same people when they exercise their option to vote?

Is this a serious question? Mush was a dictator who was never voted in by people of Pakistan. He was a an employee of Pakistan state and had no right to rule the country. Problem with our people is that they have short memories, no patience and no respect.

Mush created most of the issues in the country today. Drones, Talibanisation, Bilochistan issue were all there during Mush regime. He was a traitor who screwed the country and brought it to its knees to his lust for power.

PPP was almost wiped out in 97 and N was heading in the same direction but this h@rami messed the whole system up and took us back to 1980.

Made heroes of Bhutto and Sharifs and they are back.

Exactly, I never knew this forum had so many Musharraf fanboys. Innocent Pakistanis were handed over to the US without even being told their charges, tortured and detained without trial, due to Musharraf's collaboration with the US.

Enlightened moderation was a farce, he allied himself with the MMA. The economy was reliant on foreign aid, the so-called economic growth was built on the millions of dollars being pumped into the country. In the last two years of his rule prices of basic goods went up, there were energy shortages - so whoever mentioned that the common man had relief under Musharraf is misleading. Corruption went unabated, take Pakistan Steel Mills sale. His rule has been subject to a lot of revisionism and unfortunately the naive have bought into the Musharraf myth.

Musharaf was good when he was a dictator, the problem started when he went to the hand of politicians and started considering himself a better politician.

I have made a thread about democracy, and still support my point, that democracy in our society is just a fraud. There is more than 65% people are illiterate and out of 35 % people, how many people are really educated?

There is no literacy criteria for democracy. You are making two assumptions here. 1 - that you would not get corruption under a dictatorship, do you think it is democracy that causes corruption ? It is the politicians that cause the problem not the system - also corruption has been rife under our military rulers. 2 - there are educated people who write PHD thesis defending PPP/Nawaz/MQM and democracy does work in countries even where literacy is not at the same level as more developed nations.

how wrong can you be?it was started by Zia ul Haq well supported by PPP as well..Musharraf in fact reacted against these safe heavens otherwise we would have seen extremists run over our NWFP like they did in Northeren Mali or half of Syria..

Prime Minister Gilani said at the National Assembly session to leave former president Pervez Musharraf to himself and let him exercise his right to a political career in Pakistan. President Zardari said that if Musharraf wants to return, he will have to cross the same bumpy road as him to get to the presidency or premiership. Nawaz Sharif, Chaudhry Shujaat and the remaining politicians, including religious parties, want him tried for treason, Dr Aafia’s case and introducing extremism in the country.

Since the launch of his party on October 1, Musharraf has been on a political offensive. He has talked about the deal with Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto. He has also reportedly accepted that the military trained jihadis to force India to the discussion table to resolve the Kashmir issue – a statement which he has now backtracked from.

His opinions and speeches have led most of his opponents to start wondering what he’s been smoking!

However, these are just some of the achievements of the man when he was in and out of uniform.

1. Nine world class engineering universities were developed and 18 public universities further developed.

2. Pakistan was ranked third in world banking profitability.

3. The IT industry was valued at around $2 billion, including $1 billion in exports and employed around 90,000 professionals.

4. The CNG sector attracted over $70 billion in investment in the past five years and created 45,000 jobs.

5. The telecommunications sector attracted around $10 billion in investments and created over 1.3 million jobs.

6. Industrial parks were set up throughout the country for the first time.

17. Large scale manufacturing was at a 30-year high, and construction at a 17-year high.

18. Copper and gold deposits were found in Chagai, worth about $600 million annually if sold.

19. A new oil refinery with the UAE that could process 300,000 oil barrels a day was established.

20. The industrial sector registered 26 per cent growth.

21. The economy was the third fastest growing economy after China and India .

22. The Institute of Space Technology was established.

23. Sardar Bahadur Khan Women University Quetta was established.

24. The University of Science and Technology, Bannu, was established.

25. The University of Hazara was founded.

26. The Malakand University in Chakdara was established.

27. The University of Gujrat was established

28. The Virtual University of Pakistan was established

29. Sarhad University of IT in Peshawar was established

30. The National Law University in Islamabad was established

31. The Media University in Islamabad was established

32. University of Education in Lahore was established

33. Lasbela University of Marine Sciences, Baluchistan, was established

34. Baluchistan University of IT & Management, Quetta (2002)

35. The Pakistan economy was worth $ 160 billion in 2007

36. GDP Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) was $ 475.5 billion in 2007

37. The GDP per Capita in 2007 was $ 1000

38. Revenue collection in 2007/08 was Rs1.002 billion

39. Exports in 2007were worth $18.5 billion

40. Textile exports in 2007 were worth $11.2 billion

41. Foreign direct investment in 2007 was $8.5 billion

42. Debt servicing in 2007 was 26 per cent of the GDP

43. The poverty level in 2007 was 24 per cent

44. The literacy rate in 2007 was 53 per cent

45. Pakistan development programs in 2007 were valued at Rs520 billion

46. The Karachi stock exchange in 2007 was $70 billion at 15,000 points

47. Exports in 2007: $18.5 billion

48. Pakistan now has a total of 245,682 educational institutions in all categories, including 164,579 in the public sector and 81,103 in the private sector, according to the National Education Census (NEC-2005).

49. There are now more than 5,000 Pakistanis doing PhDs in foreign countries on scholarship. 300 Pakistanis receive PhD degrees every year, in 1999, the number was just 20.

This was some of the good Musharraf delivered to Pakistan during his martially-democratic rule from 1999 to 2008. Strange how quickly we forget his foreign policy efforts, which helped elevate the image of Pakistan globally added acceptance value to our green passports. Even the Indians next door were ready to discuss Kashmir for a solution and praised the man for his sincerity, honesty and amicable handling of the issues.

Of course, he has the right to tell his opponents, “tameez say baat karo, warna munh toor jawab millayga” and it is true that most of them are keeping quiet since he said this in a recent interview with Express TV.

I feel he knows more than what he has already said so far, and may explode if not “handled with caution”. This goes for all the politicians cum armed forces of Pakistan. Hence, be careful everyone, the General is coming back as a civilian!

mushy was a good army chief but a crap politican, he managed to make enemies in every sector from mullahs to lawyers.
He also become a part of the same corrupt system he initially tried to counteract with all his land acquiring schemes and army nepotism, and so set himself up great for karma

Zardari hasn't tried to change anything

"If you want to win a battle without waging war, spread obscenity in its youth."

I think its summed up in this thread, Mush was a great patriot who really messed up big time by making PMLQ, he was a dictator and could have used his powers to create a new party full of patriots and intellects.

If you want to destroy a country, just create enmity between its people and their army - Salahuddin

Musharraf's era was the worst because Zardari's era is a result of the Musharraf's era.

Musharraf went to bed with PML-Q, MQM, PPP, MMA and any one crooked enough to support him
He paved the way for Zardari to get back in.
He destroyed institutions which are now in disarray and unable to do anything about Zardari
He worsened the Balochistan crisis
He opened the gates of the war into Pakistan by going into NWFP
He opened the gates of suicide bombings by his heavy handedness against the Lal Masjid clowns.
He gave away army land to generals and politicians for their support
The inflation slide started in his era
Oil crisis started in his era

Musharraf's era was the worst because Zardari's era is a result of the Musharraf's era.

Musharraf went to bed with PML-Q, MQM, PPP, MMA and any one crooked enough to support him
He paved the way for Zardari to get back in.
He destroyed institutions which are now in disarray and unable to do anything about Zardari
He worsened the Balochistan crisis
He opened the gates of the war into Pakistan by going into NWFP
He opened the gates of suicide bombings by his heavy handedness against the Lal Masjid clowns.
He gave away army land to generals and politicians for their support
The inflation slide started in his era
Oil crisis started in his era

Zardari's era is where all of the above reached it's climax and peak.

Being a democratic leader and have support from all the political parties and the oppostion PMLN, being the army chief on his side ( by giving the extension), has Zardari tried to solve any of the above issue or crises?

People here complain about PPP/PML-N - who brought these crooks and thieves back under NRO, with the collaboration of the Americans ? None other than the so-called 'patriot' Musharraf. Why do people forget these things so easily ?

People here complain about PPP/PML-N - who brought these crooks and thieves back under NRO, with the collaboration of the Americans ? None other than the so-called 'patriot' Musharraf. Why do people forget these things so easily ?

As this was around 2007, the saga with the Chief Justice was going on, people were demanding he resign from the army uniform and so he brought in civilians like Bhutto to give credibility to his failing regime - by pardoning her and some senior PPP officials, and members of other parties such as PML-N, MQM, ANP. Many people who benefited from the NRO amnesty were murderers, thieves and implicated in many corruption cases. This was done with the collaboration of the US government.

As this was around 2007, the saga with the Chief Justice was going on, people were demanding he resign from the army uniform and so he brought in civilians like Bhutto to give credibility to his failing regime - by pardoning her and some senior PPP officials, and members of other parties such as PML-N, MQM, ANP. Many people who benefited from the NRO amnesty were murderers, thieves and implicated in many corruption cases. This was done with the collaboration of the US government.

No, in 2001 he inexplicably threw Pakistan's lot in with the Americans. Innocent Pakistanis were imprisoned at the behest of the US, tortured and were detained without trial, without due process and not even being told their charges. This sordid 'War on Terror' that Musharraf joined in has resulted in a militancy problem that today threatens the very existence of the state. Foreign aid poured into the country, including more American aid than at any other point in Pakistan's history. Dollars went straight into the bank account of Musharraf loyalists. Corruption went unabated. 'Enlightened moderation' was hailed - yet Musharraf allied himself with the reactionary right-wingers of the MMA. Balochistan issue still remained unsolved, and infact arguably became worse.

As I mentioned before:

Musharraf's existence had no effect on the economy. The global economy was booming during 2000-2007 so how can people attribute the economy to him - people forget Musharraf's last two years when inflation was high, the cost of living was increasing and unemployment rapidly increased. Nothing was done about electricity shortages. There was the decision to export wheat in 2007 that created shortages and price hikes that helped bring down the PML-Q government and ultimately led to President Musharraf's departure.

The vulnerability of the economy to external funds was revealed by the data on investments and its sources by the finance ministry. During the Musharraf period, the rate of investment had increased by a third, from 17.2% of GDP in 2001-02 to 23% in 2006-07. However domestic savings have declined from 17.8% to 16.1% of GDP in the same period.

This means that the economy was even more dependent on foreign flows than was the case in the 1990s.

Re: Musharraf's era vs Zardari era?

Originally Posted by Markhor

No, in 2001 he inexplicably threw Pakistan's lot in with the Americans. Innocent Pakistanis were imprisoned at the behest of the US, tortured and were detained without trial, without due process and not even being told their charges. This sordid 'War on Terror' that Musharraf joined in has resulted in a militancy problem that today threatens the very existence of the state. Foreign aid poured into the country, including more American aid than at any other point in Pakistan's history. Dollars went straight into the bank account of Musharraf loyalists. Corruption went unabated. 'Enlightened moderation' was hailed - yet Musharraf allied himself with the reactionary right-wingers of the MMA. Balochistan issue still remained unsolved, and infact arguably became worse.

Difficult to answer as it is a hypothetical question but we might not have had 45,000 dead as a result, nor would we have a drone programme operating in the country.

That's not to say militancy wasn't a problem before 2001, there were anti-Shia organisations operating ever since the 1980s but if Musharraf hadn't given the go-ahead to a full alliance with the US, then the militants we see running around today would not have had the excuse to do the things that they are doing. We should have sealed the border and stayed neutral, and had our own strategy for dealing with militants. But Musharraf jumped at the first opportunity to ally himself with the US so that millions of dollars of foreign aid would flow into the country.

Then why did Musharaf send General Mahmood and others to talk to Mullah Omar to tell them to dig in before the US invaded Afghanistan. Little did the Pakistanis know that the respectable Mullahs in that delegation were carrying listening devices and the Americans were listening on everything that was being said.

Some thought this could be a gravy train for decades! But as always they had no clue what they were letting themselves in for and ended up having to cut deals with the devil here there and everywhere. To the point, the life of pakistani was up for sale. As long as you can deliver people, anyone, even the innocent, you can mint it.

Zardari era is our worst era in every sense of the word. The most corrupt and damaging government to ever come in history.

He was so bad, last 5 yeas have been so brutal that Mush's time was badly missed.

To answer whether or not Pakistan should have joined US in 2001? No one would have refused neither was Pakistan in a position to refuse. Had NS been in power he would have joined too. Circumstances around the world gave us no choice in the matter.